Allowed

Arpit Gupta v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Aug 2021BAIL/11165/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed the second bail application of Arpit Gupta. Although the first bail was rejected, the court held that without entering into the merits, the facts and circumstances, nature of accusation, and severity of punishment warranted release. Bail was granted subject to conditions including attending all court dates and not causing delays.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each, subject to conditions regarding court appearances and conduct.

Arpit Gupta Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. IInd BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11165 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Arpit Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Nazrul Islam Jafri,Ankur Agarwal,Nagendra Pratap Singh,Ravi Prakash Singh,Sanjeev Kumar Pandey,Sudarshan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P and perused the material available on record.

¶6

This is second bail application. The first bail application was rejected by this Court on 19.12.2018.

¶7

As a measure of fresh ground, it has been contended on behalf of the applicant that insofar as merit of the case is concerned, the same has been considered as argued. However, new development is that after due investigation, it was found that ten Aadhar cards allegedly recovered from possession of the applicant were found to be valid and were not fake. In case the applicant is granted bail, there is no possibility of misusing the liberty of bail. The applicant is languishing in jail since 17.08.2018.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed prayer for bail.

¶9

Without entering into merit of the case but considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with witness or apprehension of threat to the complainant and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the second bail application is allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant Arpit Gupta involved in Case

¶11

Crime No.455 of 2018, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., 65, 66 Information Technology Act, 2000, 36 and 42 Aadhar Act, Police Station Chandausi, District Sambhal be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶12

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶13

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶16

Order Date :- 17.8.2021

¶17

rkg

Arpit Gupta v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arpit Gupta v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shubham Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kailashi Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pradeep Vs State of U.P. and Another

Zarif and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dharmendra Kumar @ Sanjay Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt Usha Devi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another